Did the 12 team playoff achieve it's goal?

[dtgold88]

The only team that got a bye, who looked like they deserved a bye, was Arizona State, and before the games were played they were probably thought the least deserving of one.

I get what you say about the blowouts, I can imagine most years that the 1-16 game is not going to be close, and probably the next three matchups as well.

13-0 Oregon didn't deserve a bye?

 

[foster4prez]

13-0 Oregon didn't deserve a bye?

"who looked like they deserved a bye"

 

[dtgold88]

"who looked like they deserved a bye"

Yeah after seeing this again I get what you mean.

But this happens in MLB or NFL when teams with byes lose. Ignored when they win. I think any coach offered the chance at a bye is taking it.

Likely other than Oregon the teams given byes just were not that good (backup QB might have made UGA that way).

 

[TheLonestarDUCK]

3 1/2 week bye is too long. Either go to 16 or 8. I preferred the 4 teams it kept the regular season meaningful. I look at it this way, the regular season is a glorified 1st round that determines the final four.

 

[Ron G]

They should probably move it to 16 teams. I feel like the wait screwed over the top seeds.

Ok, here is a question for you or anyone else. Next year you are the coach of a conference champion and have one of the byes. But because of the thought that the bye hurt teams this year, you (by virtue of your great season and Conference championship) are given the options of giving up your bye and taking the 5 seed instead. What would you do? What do you think any coach would do?

 

[Ron G]

For all the complaints about the bye layoff and non-deserving teams getting the bye, here is what the playoffs would have looked like with "the best teams" getting the bye:

1 thru 4 Oregon, Georgia, Texas and Penn State (Oregon #1, pick the rest of the order)
5 thru 8 ND, Ohio State, Tenn, Arizona or Boise State pick the order
9-thru12 Indiana, Arizona State or Boise St, SMU and Clemson pick the order.

The first round would have gone to ND, Ohio State, Tenn and either Arizona St or Boise State if they played each other. In this likely set up, the only team that would advance but did not is Tenn.

So depending on the seeding, what makes anybody think that results would have been any different unless ND and Ohio State met in the second or third game. ND could be against Georgia----Ohio State against Tenn----Texas against Arizona State -----------and Penn State against Oregon. Penn St vs Oregon would be the outlier and neither was able to win against ones who were left.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

Ok, here is a question for you or anyone else. Next year you are the coach of a conference champion and have one of the byes. But because of the thought that the bye hurt teams this year, you (by virtue of your great season and Conference championship) are given the options of giving up your bye and taking the 5 seed instead. What would you do? What do you think any coach would do?

I think everyone would take the free win.

 

[belcherboy]

It doesn't appear that the final four was a ratings boom. Although, they did add several games for additional ratings.

Why do you think the ratings were down? All four teams are traditional blue blood programs with a BIG following.

 

[Mebert]

I hate that games are deciding things now, let's go back to letting flawed algorithms decide it.

 

[belcherboy]

I hate that games are deciding things now, let's go back to letting flawed algorithms decide it.

I understand both sides of this argument. The regular season used to feel like a playoff system on its own. If you lost a game—especially late in the season—you were likely out of contention. But on the other hand, one bad game shouldn’t automatically disqualify a team from being considered one of the best in the country.

I know the playoffs will only expand from here, and there’s no chance of reducing the number of teams. That said, I feel like having 6–8 teams would have been the perfect balance. Most the playoff games so far haven’t been that exciting (most weren't exciting in the 4 team format too), and the long gap between the end of the regular season and the conclusion of the playoffs makes it even worse in keeping casual fans connected.

Since the 12-team (or more) playoff system is here to stay, I think there are some changes that could improve it:

• Eliminate conference championship games (or at least make the rest of the conference play an extra game to balance the schedule).
• Adjust how rankings are decided. They shouldn’t rely solely on conference champions; a committee should evaluate teams more comprehensively.
• Shorten the playoff timeline. Start the playoffs in early to mid-December and aim to finish around January 1st. Skipping conference championship games could allow the playoffs to start in early December, making the season flow better.

 

[foster4prez]

It doesn't appear that the final four was a ratings boom. Although, they did add several games for additional ratings.

Why do you think the ratings were down? All four teams are traditional blue blood programs with a BIG following.

Games were played on Thursday vs middle of the day on a holiday.

Also, bowls as a whole were WAY up in viewership this year.

ESPN's College Football Bowl Viewership Reaches Record Highs for 2024-25 Season

The 2024-25 college football bowl season on ESPN platforms saw remarkable growth, drawing significant increases in viewership across..

espnpressroom.com